hirao
hirao OP wrote
Reply to comment by subrosa in What kind of anarchist are you and why? by hirao
Direct democracy is a form of radical democracy and you can't have anarchism without that.
hirao OP wrote
Reply to comment by willow in Do the people on this site not support left-unity? That's the impression I'm getting, but why? by hirao
80% Why is that? Why does it use a red logo and communist aesthetic if it's really for non socialists?
hirao OP wrote
Reply to comment by ziq in Do the people on this site not support left-unity? That's the impression I'm getting, but why? by hirao
There's no fundamental difference between anarchism and communism so I don't understand why we can't get along with people who wish to get to communism / anarchism using a vanguard.
I honestly believe most anarchists misread the history of vanguardism. The vanguard is never supposed to exist as a formal structure with power over the rest of the revolution, it's a social phenomena that will be present in any revolution and so those who fall into should be aware of their social role. There is a vanguard among anarchists socially (that's the point of criticizing horizontalism, it fails to deal with the vanguard in a constructive way). It's not supposed to be made into a rigid party bureaucracy. As long as the true intent of vanguardism is followed, there is honestly no difference between our objectives.
hirao wrote
Reply to comment by Bezotcovschina in What unconditional support for democracy looks like in an "anarchist". by OdiousOutlaw
But seriously only someone who believes in "survival of the fittest" would want to live in a society with no rules.
hirao wrote
Reply to comment by kin in What unconditional support for democracy looks like in an "anarchist". by OdiousOutlaw
What do you mean? I said reactionaries, as in capitalists and fascists.
hirao OP wrote
Reply to comment by subrosa in What kind of anarchist are you and why? by hirao
hirao wrote
Reply to comment by GlangSnorrisson in Friday Free Talk: 27/08/2020 by mofongo
I don't think this is a fair assessment. A guillotine doesn't require a state to wield it.
hirao wrote
Reply to comment by Bezotcovschina in What unconditional support for democracy looks like in an "anarchist". by OdiousOutlaw
Are you some kind of predator?
hirao wrote
Reply to comment by hirao in Entryist caught in the act by Bezotcovschina
I'm literally being downvoted for saying we should read Marx before rejecting him.
hirao wrote
Reply to comment by kin in What unconditional support for democracy looks like in an "anarchist". by OdiousOutlaw
I suppose this is true, reactionaries wouldn't have full rights in a communist society because we'd have to strictly control them so they don't re-install capitalism.
hirao wrote
Reply to comment by kin in What unconditional support for democracy looks like in an "anarchist". by OdiousOutlaw
Well no because a perfect utopia by definition can't be tainted by oppression. There can be oppression in the planning stages of trying to achieve the utopia, but once you have communism, everyone is equal so oppression becomes impossible.
hirao OP wrote
Reply to comment by subrosa in What kind of anarchist are you and why? by hirao
Personally I adopt multiple labels: anarchist, Marxist, supporter of radical democracy, feminist, anti-imperialist, and so on.
hirao wrote
Reply to comment by !deleted20335 in by !deleted20335
Mayyyyybbbe you shouldnt base your theory on how to have a socialist revolution on whether certain philosophers were antisemitic in the 1700s/1800s, because pretty much all of them were. Just a helpful suggestion.
hirao wrote
Reply to Entryist caught in the act by Bezotcovschina
How can you claim to be an anti-capitalist without first reading Marx? There's no better study of capitalism. Of course read Kropotkin and Bakunin too, but you must read Marx to truly understand what we're up against.
hirao wrote
Reply to comment by Bezotcovschina in What unconditional support for democracy looks like in an "anarchist". by OdiousOutlaw
You think freedom is a society where people can murder you and face no consequences?
hirao wrote
Reply to comment by Ganggang in Every ML and their token "Anarchist" friend by OdiousOutlaw
Well Lenin follows Engels' idea that the state exists as an instrument of ruler-ship of the dominant class over the oppressed class, and that the only way to get rid of the state as such is to get rid of the class antagonism. Once you achieve that, the state withers away automatically.
It's not reconcilable with the typical white American Anarchist approach that wants to abolish the state as a first step towards a classless society. From the ML perspective, Anarchists are proceeding in the wrong order, and i believe them to be right about this.
However, I love anarchism for its conviction, moral values and small-scale praxis and i'm all for left unity with MLs. My suggestion to reconcile Anarchism and Communism is to have Anarchist enclaves within the worker's state once it is established, as a kind of test bed for the transition from state-owned to worker-owned economy.
For that to be a possibility, we would first have to tackle the outside pressures (imperialism), of course, because this approach is unworkable under the conditions of siege socialism we've seen in socialist states in the past. You can hardly say "sure, we Anarchists can just do our thing in that zone" when you're constantly threatened by imperialist subversion attempts or outright plans for hostile invasion or the installation of dictators. Under those circumstances, you need a strong centralisation of power were everybody contributes in a structured, organised way, which leads to the very important siege socialism described in Parenti's works.
This is a secondary problem, though, as the removal of imperialist and fascist interference should be the immediate concern and priority of all anti-capitalist movements in the Imperial Core to begin with. To make socialist approaches attractive to ignorant Westerners, we first need to create states that can develop as something else than siege socialism. So the conditions necessary for the co-existence of MLs and Anarchists are simultaneously the conditions needed for post-capitalist societies to unfold their full potential and develop unhampered by outside forces.
hirao wrote
Reply to comment by Bezotcovschina in China Secretly Built A Vast New Infrastructure To Imprison Muslims by ziq
Anti-imperialists / leftists.
hirao wrote (edited )
Reply to comment by Bezotcovschina in Entryist caught in the act (after being massively upvoted by unthinking ancoms) by ziq
Read Marx. I'm embarrassed for you that you haven't.
hirao wrote
Reply to comment by kin in What unconditional support for democracy looks like in an "anarchist". by OdiousOutlaw
The commune?
hirao wrote
Maybe you should listen to what anti-imperialist countries say instead of white liberals about China.
Also, maybe get a materialist framework instead of thinking the world is divided into various levels of "good" and "evil" like some kind of religious zealot. Whether or not a country is "good" doesn't matter in anti-imperialism. Anti-imperialism isn't a moral crusade. It's recognising the primary contradiction in the world is US Imperialism, and working to destroy it regardless of internal political contradictions.
This is why we support Iran. This is why we support Syria. This is why we support Hezbollah. Not because they're "good", but because they are working towards a common goal to dismantle American hegemony. You're a fucking idiot if you shun one of the largest military powers in the world that shares major goals with you because they're meanie heads at home. This is reality. US Imperialism kills more people and spreads more misery than China ever could and China is virtually alone fighting against it, with some support from Russia and North Korea.
It's also embarrassing as fuck that a bunch of white Americans who know absolutely nothing about the situation in China think that they can pull something out of their ass like "China is actually doing a genocide" without getting laughed out. What's the source on this shit? Buzzfeed?? What the fuck is wrong with you people
hirao wrote
Reply to comment by Bezotcovschina in What unconditional support for democracy looks like in an "anarchist". by OdiousOutlaw
The freedom to not be murdered?
hirao wrote
Reply to comment by Bezotcovschina in Entryist caught in the act (after being massively upvoted by unthinking ancoms) by ziq
Well the ones who read theory believe in it, absolutely.
hirao wrote
It's dangerous to not engage in the materialist correct approach of the situation as a socialist in a fascist empire (USA) gearing up for a full out new Cold war against another power that however shitty, is the best alternative by a huge margin, even more so for other socialist countries like Cuba and Venezuela who need a strong socialist state to protect them from America. You must do whatever you can to not let the public opinion of every part of the American people to spiral into not only Sinophobia and a destructive imperialist mindset. Every third world socialist including Castro and Che would spit in your face for taking such reactionary stances against NK or China or Libya or Syria or Belarus.
Yeah I have my criticism and issues with China or whatever from the left but there is zero reason why they should ever come up in any discussion or interaction with a Westerner and will only take any negative I bring up as something that justifies or feeds the anti China narrative. You gain no points from liberals by showing how nuanced you are as a leftist that hates China/NK/Assad, you only become a useless tool for the US state Department and the narrative it seeks to paint.
Both siding and the obsession of Western leftists to show how very "anti-authoritarian" and un "tankies" they are has rendered any anti imperialist stance in America into being watered down and useless. You should defend even the "bad" countries against this current neoliberal climate without prefacing it with a paragraph of your "criticisms". It simply doesn't work like that and liberals, neocons and the empire will happily take your criticisms to render anti-imperialism into something useless
hirao OP wrote
Reply to comment by Raxalor in What kind of anarchist are you and why? by hirao
But couldn't you just as easily call yourself simply a communist since the end state of communism is anarchy?